|
Post by warriorpride on Jun 16, 2008 16:56:06 GMT -5
I'd venture a guess that it'd be very small. Boundaries are about as hot a spot that you can get - and reopening that can of worms seems like a really bad idea, even if someone provided a full boundary plan that was "better". Why would the SB want to do this? M O N E Y I'd guess the economy will be worse come spring of 09 than 'better'. From earlier today... Don't you think that cost is only one part of the criteria that should be used to define boundaries? Yes, agreed, it is only 1 part. It's a quantifiable part too that is not open to interpretation. Numbers compare as either greater than, less than or equal to. Opinion doesn't factor in at all. Arch, you agreed (highlighted above in red, by me) that there are multiple criteria to take into when defining boundaries, but now you are saying that cost, and a potential down economy, should drive a boundary do-over? I think we need to rename this thread or start a new one, but if the title is something like "should boundaries be reconsidered", I don't think that it will be warmly received. In fact, I started one a few weeks ago: ip204.proboards92.com/index.cgi?board=soundoff&action=display&thread=702Add to it if you want. I just re-read it. The posts do stray quite a bit, and I see a couple of people that support MW moving to WV (which, correct me if I'm wrong, is your desired outcome). But, I don't see a whole bunch of support for a major re-working of the boundaries. There are probably at least as many, if not more, good reasons for NOT opening this very sensitive topic up again. I think there would be a huge backlash if the SB even considered this right now. There has to be a driving force - a very significant reason - and I don't see it right now. I know it's important to you and few others on this board and a few others in the district, but it's a small group. And the SB would be pissing off a much larger group of people if they opened this up again. They would would also be subjected to questioning of their integrity, as well as their motives. Again, I ask - why would the SB do this to us and to themselves?
|
|
|
Post by gatordog on Jun 16, 2008 16:56:59 GMT -5
Unnatural lines through neighborhoods ? You mean like having Lehigh Station be poart of Watts, and then with this new plan to minimize that - adding another area at Rt 59 and North Aurora Ave. ? Watts now has 3 satellites, not sure why that is OK after their last plan that was to address being contiguous. Absolutely not what I am talking about. I am talking about for example drawing a line somewhere through Oakhurst (Steck area). Where do you draw that line? Or another example, can we draw a line through Tall Grass somewhere? These are examples where sending these areas to different HS, MS, (or ES for that matter!) is extremely difficult to justify. These areas had a separation line drawn through them.....because the district built a new ES, Owen! Was that a bad thing for this neighborhood?
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jun 16, 2008 17:23:35 GMT -5
M O N E Y I'd guess the economy will be worse come spring of 09 than 'better'. From earlier today... Yes, agreed, it is only 1 part. It's a quantifiable part too that is not open to interpretation. Numbers compare as either greater than, less than or equal to. Opinion doesn't factor in at all. Arch, you agreed (highlighted above in red, by me) that there are multiple criteria to take into when defining boundaries, but now you are saying that cost, and a potential down economy, should drive a boundary do-over? I think we need to rename this thread or start a new one, but if the title is something like "should boundaries be reconsidered", I don't think that it will be warmly received. In fact, I started one a few weeks ago: ip204.proboards92.com/index.cgi?board=soundoff&action=display&thread=702Add to it if you want. I just re-read it. The posts do stray quite a bit, and I see a couple of people that support MW moving to WV (which, correct me if I'm wrong, is your desired outcome). But, I don't see a whole bunch of support for a major re-working of the boundaries. There are probably at least as many, if not more, good reasons for NOT opening this very sensitive topic up again. I think there would be a huge backlash if the SB even considered this right now. There has to be a driving force - a very significant reason - and I don't see it right now. I know it's important to you and few others on this board and a few others in the district, but it's a small group. And the SB would be pissing off a much larger group of people if they opened this up again. They would would also be subjected to questioning of their integrity, as well as their motives. Again, I ask - why would the SB do this to us and to themselves? On here, yes we agree it's more than one thing. What was mentioned was lack of support and I pointed out the one thing that most people grab onto in a down economy.. tax payer money being spent. The backlash speculation is simply that, speculation. It assumes it honks more people off than who's situations are improved. The main reasons to not open it again are mostly emotional and now is definitely not the time given what has happened the past few months. When cooler heads might prevail, perhaps but right now everyone still has their quills up to even go down the road productively out in public.
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Jun 16, 2008 17:24:10 GMT -5
Unnatural lines through neighborhoods ? You mean like having Lehigh Station be poart of Watts, and then with this new plan to minimize that - adding another area at Rt 59 and North Aurora Ave. ? Watts now has 3 satellites, not sure why that is OK after their last plan that was to address being contiguous. Absolutely not what I am talking about. I am talking about for example drawing a line somewhere through Oakhurst (Steck area). Where do you draw that line? Or another example, can we draw a line through Tall Grass somewhere? These are examples where sending these areas to different HS, MS, (or ES for that matter!) is extremely difficult to justify. These areas had a separation line drawn through them.....because the district built a new ES, Owen! Was that a bad thing for this neighborhood? Ask them now that they are split for HS and the answer may be different than 6 months ago...however the point is a line HAD to be drawn somewhere- it was drawn there between neighbors that had to go to school together. It was drawn to send kids to a closer school- what a novel concept.
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jun 16, 2008 17:36:39 GMT -5
I'd venture a guess that it'd be very small. Boundaries are about as hot a spot that you can get - and reopening that can of worms seems like a really bad idea, even if someone provided a full boundary plan that was "better". Why would the SB want to do this? I am with you WP. Our district behaves so well during boundary changes, I imagine a 3rd time would be just as good. Me personally, I will fight tooth and nail any change in boundaries. I don't give a d**n where my child goes to high school but do not change it after this next school year starts. MV, NV, WV, MV, WV. Sorry, not going down that road again. Spring 09 will be interesting because 4 seats can control the direction of the school board every time it votes and what motions get voted on.
|
|
|
Post by majorianthrax on Jun 16, 2008 17:47:15 GMT -5
I am with you WP. Our district behaves so well during boundary changes, I imagine a 3rd time would be just as good. Me personally, I will fight tooth and nail any change in boundaries. I don't give a d**n where my child goes to high school but do not change it after this next school year starts. MV, NV, WV, MV, WV. Sorry, not going down that road again. Spring 09 will be interesting because 4 seats can control the direction of the school board every time it votes and what motions get voted on. Interesting indeed. The SB elections will have more fireworks then the 4th of July. A new chapter in the #204 capers
|
|
player
Master Member
Posts: 188
|
Post by player on Jun 16, 2008 17:58:27 GMT -5
I'm with gatormom and will fight tooth and nail to oppose any candidate who pushes boundary changes. Especially one based on mileage spreadsheets. Cheers.
|
|
|
Post by eb204 on Jun 16, 2008 18:15:45 GMT -5
I'm with gatormom and will fight tooth and nail to oppose any candidate who pushes boundary changes. Especially one based on mileage spreadsheets. Cheers. Count me in on that group, too. There is no point in doing so. I brought this up a while ago. At some point, there may be a need to change boundaries, based on population changes, overcrowding (or "undercrowding") at the ES levels, etc. Then and only then would I support another round of boundary changes. And for the record, sitting tight on the boundaries does me absolutely no good. We go to the 8th closest ES and the 3rd closest HS, so actually boundary changes would more than likely benefit me, but there is really no reason to open that issue up again for the district as a whole. If anyone runs on a promise of re-doing boundaries, they will not get my vote and I will campaign hard against them as well. Give me someone who can talk about the future of our kids and their education, NCLB, special needs, gifted, lunches, technology, and other curriculm based topics and I'll listen to their ideas. If someone talks about boundaries, I'll I'm going to hear is blah, blah, blah. Seriously.
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Jun 16, 2008 18:25:27 GMT -5
I'm with gatormom and will fight tooth and nail to oppose any candidate who pushes boundary changes. Especially one based on mileage spreadsheets. Cheers. One more reason why the word 'unity' and this district cannot be used in the same sentence. Enitre chunks of the district called out as likely not being able to support a candidate from there. A lot of I definitely won't listen to this, I won't do that - and amazingly ( or maybe not) from a lot of people who got what they wanted already. When Brookdale was shafted last time around ( and they basically were) - everyone was happy that their situation was fixed - this time those with the short end -- basically told too bad. So much for listening and healing - just empty words IMHO. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and I'll respect ( if not understand) each, but lets stop all the hoopla about how everyone is coming together. It seems the SB election upcoming will unfortunately highlight how far away from that we really are.
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jun 16, 2008 18:31:28 GMT -5
One has to ask themselves which way the NO camp votes for candidates.. those who try to save the district money ongoing or those who don't. Add those totals to the number of voters from places who could see a benefit in a closer HS, MS or even ES which in turn means less gas money spent from their family budget and we're going to have a very interesting Spring.
I personally find it interesting that many who insisted the district save money on a one time cost (land) would go against such a thing in the future on a recurring basis if it's presented (optimized boundaries). Again, coming back around to the down economy... how do you think the true 'silent majority' will vote for a candidate? (Sorry to cross thread back to the SB elections topic).
|
|
|
Post by warriorpride on Jun 16, 2008 18:39:27 GMT -5
I'm with gatormom and will fight tooth and nail to oppose any candidate who pushes boundary changes. Especially one based on mileage spreadsheets. Cheers. One more reason why the word 'unity' and this district cannot be used in the same sentence. Enitre chunks of the district called out as likely not being able to support a candidate from there. A lot of I definitely won't listen to this, I won't do that - and amazingly ( or maybe not) from a lot of people who got what they wanted already. When Brookdale was shafted last time around ( and they basically were) - everyone was happy that their situation was fixed - this time those with the short end -- basically told too bad. So much for listening and healing - just empty words IMHO. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and I'll respect ( if not understand) each, but lets stop all the hoopla about how everyone is coming together. It seems the SB election upcoming will unfortunately highlight how far away from that we really are. I have a proposal: I'll stop my hoopla if you and others stop the hoopla around 1) trivializing how easy it would be to make comprehensive (i.e. ES, MS, and HS) boundary changes that are clearly "better" than those chosen for 09 (i.e. other people would not be unhappy with changes); 2) how re-doing the boundaries will solve all problems and heal all issues within 204 (i.e. other people would not be unhappy with changes).
|
|
|
Post by Arch on Jun 16, 2008 18:43:58 GMT -5
One more reason why the word 'unity' and this district cannot be used in the same sentence. Enitre chunks of the district called out as likely not being able to support a candidate from there. A lot of I definitely won't listen to this, I won't do that - and amazingly ( or maybe not) from a lot of people who got what they wanted already. When Brookdale was shafted last time around ( and they basically were) - everyone was happy that their situation was fixed - this time those with the short end -- basically told too bad. So much for listening and healing - just empty words IMHO. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and I'll respect ( if not understand) each, but lets stop all the hoopla about how everyone is coming together. It seems the SB election upcoming will unfortunately highlight how far away from that we really are. I have a proposal: I'll stop my hoopla if you and others stop the hoopla around 1) trivializing how easy it would be to make comprehensive (i.e. ES, MS, and HS) boundary changes that are clearly "better" than those chosen for 09 (i.e. other people would not be unhappy with changes); 2) how re-doing the boundaries will solve all problems and heal all issues within 204 (i.e. other people would not be unhappy with changes). As for boundaries, what is being overlooked is the removal of the 'wow, that really sucks' situations where not everyone's a winner, but there are no 'losers' when it comes to the school commutes. Removing the worst-case so that no one has it is a step in the right direction, IMO. Obviously you disagree and that's fine that you have that opinion. Some see many clinging onto the closest school as more selfish than those wanting to just go to the second closest school (not even the closest).
|
|
|
Post by doctorwho on Jun 16, 2008 18:48:02 GMT -5
One more reason why the word 'unity' and this district cannot be used in the same sentence. Enitre chunks of the district called out as likely not being able to support a candidate from there. A lot of I definitely won't listen to this, I won't do that - and amazingly ( or maybe not) from a lot of people who got what they wanted already. When Brookdale was shafted last time around ( and they basically were) - everyone was happy that their situation was fixed - this time those with the short end -- basically told too bad. So much for listening and healing - just empty words IMHO. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and I'll respect ( if not understand) each, but lets stop all the hoopla about how everyone is coming together. It seems the SB election upcoming will unfortunately highlight how far away from that we really are. I have a proposal: I'll stop my hoopla if you and others stop the hoopla around 1) trivializing how easy it would be to make comprehensive (i.e. ES, MS, and HS) boundary changes that are clearly "better" than those chosen for 09 (i.e. other people would not be unhappy with changes); 2) how re-doing the boundaries will solve all problems and heal all issues within 204 (i.e. other people would not be unhappy with changes). I'm just pointing about the reality of the situation - for those who were so unhappy before in the district that got their situations fixed - did we tell them it couldn't be done either ? Did we tell them it didn't matter ? Yes we did and they responded - then we fixed it... so the reality is the lines are still drawn - they are not going away just because the school is being built. I am sorry, one cannot walk thru my area and tell people it's all peaches and cream now, let's all ge together and sing kumbaya - because it simply is not that easy. No one said it was easy, any change is hard - but for some to close the book and turn the page on others isn't right either. Wouldn't solve all the issues - but the harm in looking at it to see if things can be better is what ? I know my area is not important to everyone, but it is where I live - and to be ignored in the initial process and then continue to be so is wrong also. Already been told some will not vote for someone from my area because they might want to look at this issue - that is trivializtion in my book. You and others are each entitled to their opinion - just as myself and others are entitled to ours - the reality is that is why not much is going to change in the near future. There seems to be no room for compromise. No onehere is asking for the closest schools- just not the farthest- and the answer is you got what you got so shut up. Just not seeing where there will be any coming together in that scenario.
|
|
sushi
Master Member
Posts: 767
|
Post by sushi on Jun 16, 2008 20:42:10 GMT -5
I'm with gatormom and will fight tooth and nail to oppose any candidate who pushes boundary changes. Especially one based on mileage spreadsheets. Cheers. Absofreakinlutely!!! I will have plenty of time to work on it, too. If you're thinking of a tweak, I'm not sure. An overhaul? NO WAY JOSE! We can't do it again, seriously.
|
|
|
Post by warriorpride on Jun 16, 2008 21:02:23 GMT -5
I have a proposal: I'll stop my hoopla if you and others stop the hoopla around 1) trivializing how easy it would be to make comprehensive (i.e. ES, MS, and HS) boundary changes that are clearly "better" than those chosen for 09 (i.e. other people would not be unhappy with changes); 2) how re-doing the boundaries will solve all problems and heal all issues within 204 (i.e. other people would not be unhappy with changes). As for boundaries, what is being overlooked is the removal of the 'wow, that really sucks' situations where not everyone's a winner, but there are no 'losers' when it comes to the school commutes. Removing the worst-case so that no one has it is a step in the right direction, IMO. Obviously you disagree and that's fine that you have that opinion. Some see many clinging onto the closest school as more selfish than those wanting to just go to the second closest school (not even the closest). And some don't see that adding 1.5 miles to an area's HS commute as something that 'really sucks'.
|
|